Welcome to The Rant! Your very own electronic cesspool of naughty, left wing propaganda. MADE IN AMERICA!!!

Saturday, May 20, 2017

The Pied Piper of Idiot Nation

What Ailes Us

"We are a hate-filled, paranoid, untrusting, book-dumb and bilious people whose chief source of recreation is slinging insults and threats at each other online, and we're that way in large part because of the hyper-divisive media environment he discovered."

Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone

I first heard the name "Roger Ailes" over thirty years ago when read the book by Joe McGinness,The Selling of the President 1968. It chronicled how a total unknown, then based out of Philadelphia, whose only claim to fame was as the producer of the Mike Douglas Show, went to work on the Richard Nixon presidential campaign. His job was to "repackage" a thoroughly unlikable candidate like Nixon and make him palatable to the voters of America via the method of media manipulation. It worked brilliantly. Although the election results against Hubert Humphrey that year were close enough to make Nixon's people sweat bullets, he was able to win. Through the use of television advertisements that they market-tested on select audiences before they were aired, they were able to present The Trickster as an amiable, all American kind of guy. I'm sure I don't need to remind you how nicely that worked out for America, do I.Think about that: Roger's first exposure to the American people was his responsibility for the presidency of Richard Milhous Nixon. It all goes downhill from there.

Roger and The Donald

I didn't experience any degree of schadenfreude this week when I learned about the passing of Roger Ailes. The details of his death were pretty depressing in-and-of themselves - killed after slipping on the tiled bathroom floor at his home in Florida. How the mighty have fallen. Only ten months before he had been on top of the world as the head of the empire he created almost single-handedly: Fox News - only to be forcibly dethrowned from his perch after it was revealed that he had been involved in the sexual harassment of scores of the leggy blonde news starlets that have been the staple of that organization for over two decades. The best line I read concerning Ailes' passing came from Rolling Stone's Matt Taibbi. When he mentioned to a relative that he was going to tackle this subject in his next piece, the "relative" (probably his father, NBC reporter Mike Taibbi) said to him, "Say that you hope he's reborn as a woman in Saudi Arabia."FUN FACT: It was Ailes, more than anyone, who was responsible for getting John Lennon to appear on the Mike Douglas Show in the late winter of 1972. There you have it: Other than the unintentional laughs mined from the occasional viewing of Fox Noise, that is the only positive fact regarding the man's entire career that I'm able to come up with.

Fox and "Friends"

No, I can't get too worked up over the death of Roger Ailes. The damage the old bugger did to the country he professed to love so well is too immense to be catalogued in this limited space. Fourteen years ago, at a time when an appalling number of Americans believed Saddam Hussein to be responsible for the carnage of September 11, 2001, polls proved conclusively that around seventy-five present of the citizenry who believed such nonsense described themselves as habitual viewers of Fox Noise. In addition to Dick Nixon's, Roger Ailes - more than anyone - may take credit for the administrations of George W. Bush and Donald J. Trump. He is not solely responsible for the atrocious dumbing-down of this doomed nation in the last fifty years, but he at least deserves a dishonorary mention. All of us today find ourselves stewing in the juices of Roger's sick vision. His success was due primarily to the fact that his entire career depended upon his appealing to the most appalling angels of the American nature. That's some legacy, huh?

He should have stuck with Mike Douglas.

Tom Degan

Goshen, NY

SUGGESTED READING:

Roger Ailes Was One of the Worst Americans Ever

by Matt Taibbi

Here's a link to read Matt's assessment of the life and career of Roger Ailes, and the damage he did to this country:

Read it and weep.AFTERTHOUGHT:By the way, do you want to enjoy a really hardy laugh? Monday morning, tune into the first fifteen minutes of Fox and Friends. You must see it to believe it. It's that bad.

Just fantastic. I personally stopped watching TV about 40 years ago. It turns out that everything you could possibly want to know is in the bold print screaming headlines of the papers and on the internet. Good riddance to the likes of Roger Ailes. I'll bet Trump sent a note of condolence. I withhold mine. Ailes did in fact mess up Amerika. I ran into people along the way who swore by Fox Noise. Their issue. Not mine.

Harvard University has written a new dress code that defines ties, a traditional male dress accessory, as a symbol of oppression, chauvinism, and hate speech. The decision came after a women's rights group petitioned the school board to ban neckties, claiming that students have been triggered by seeing such a “flamboyant and offensive” micro-aggression carried around even by their own professors.

Immediately after the board’s decision, a mass email was sent to all students and faculty of the new dress code, stating that if the new policy was disobeyed it could bring about “serious consequences” including expulsion.

More craziness from the loonie left. Is it any wonder they fear the free market place of ideas? Hateful? Celebrating the death of a man? Thanks again for proving my point.

Tom Degan: "'Say that you hope he's reborn as a woman in Saudi Arabia.'"

So appropriate, I agree. Or maybe a black woman from any ghetto in the United States, or any person of color from just about anywhere in the United States. The fate of karma works that way. His soul...his essence, is going to discover this.

No longer do we seek and work for justice. Now we work and "resist" for retribution and revenge. Anyone that dares speak out of turn, let alone stray from far left ideology, shall feel that "retribution" in all its wrath. Right?

Whether this amounts to abiding by one's anachronistic faith and refusing to bake a cake for a gay wedding, or wearing a neck tie in order to offend other snowflakes on college campuses with such a hateful microaggression is all punishable by the "code" of the militant left.

I guess my quest to save common sense truly is at a desperate point in our nation right now. Roger Ailes is evil for providing a platform for ideas that are outside of progressive orthodoxy, but George Soros is a kind benefactor who seeks only to spread the goodness and rightness of progressivism.

"Almost as nonsensical"? So says a major liar, comparing his outright lie to positions that have actual supporting evidence. Cons. The word fits so well, doesn't it?

There are real reasons to think 9-11 wasn't investigated thoroughly and to question the government line. Or is that only OKIYAR? There are real reasons to think Russian helped Trump defeat Hillary. Ask the intelligence agencies.

There are real reasons to think the rich get most of the tax breaks, especially on the repeal of Obamacare.

Greg Gianforte, the Republican candidate for Montana’s open House seat, stands to get tax cuts worth nearly $800,000 a year if the House health care bill becomes law, according to a new analysis.

But why waste facts on a con? They don't want them and don't need them.

And TP,

What's that you say about neckties? You're "knot" serious, are you? Or is your little Major liar the man to believe?

What's that you say about Ailes and Soros?

Yeah. Party line BS all the way. You buy the necktie lie just like you buy sex offender, Trumpist and Nixon toady Ailes's lies, aka "platform for ideas that are outside of progressive orthodoxy".

Lies.

"American Conservatism is about willfully believing, without evidence, the worst lies about people they hate". - Dave Dubya

Thank you major and TP for proving my statement. Soon I will be writing a post on "How to think like a conservative".

It is basically the same as "How to think like a Moonie cultist". Believe. Simply believe without question. Amirite? It all "ties" together, doesn't it?

TP's' buddy provided you with some satire from one of the best blogs on the internet,The People's Cube. Not at all surprised you didn't get it. Liberal's lost their sense of humor when HRC cheated Bernie out of the nomination.

Here's another one that you won't get.

WANTED: anonymous sources - exciting new career opp!anonymous sources at NYT Do you hate Donald Trump?

Is your lifelong dream to destroy his presidency? Do you live for nothing else these days?

Are you looking for a flexible job that requires little effort while allowing you to be as outrageous as you want? Do you enjoy throwing stuff at the wall and watching it slide down to the floor leaving a trail of slime?

Then mainstream media outlets, especially the New York Times and Washington Post, would like to offer you a position as an ANONYMOUS SOURCE!

"What makes it so 'leftist', other than another pretext for scorn for different viewpoints?TP's buddy posted a bald-faced LIE, but liberals are demonized...again. Far Right 'values'. Truth ain't one of 'em, folks, but the sane among us already know this." ~ Dubya

I really have to laugh. Dave, I truly think that you are a good guy and have a good heart that wants what is best for most people. That said, your blindness and projection are absolutely unparalleled, my friend.

The very essence of the militant left (not every leftist, mind you) is an abject scorn for conservative view points. They champion diversity in all things... except for diversity of ideas. This is particularly so in much of academia. Because little to no dissenting views are tolerated, many of the militant left automatically assume their views must be correct... from climate change to just war theory to capitalism versus socialism to you-name-it. They simply must be right.

As for Majormajor's tie comment, I admittedly did not verify the veracity of it; however, in light of many major universities establishing "safe zones", talking about "microaggressions, and considering any orthodox Christian moral philosophy as hate speech, is it really a stretch to assume that neck ties would be considered a form of patriarchal superiority or oppression or whatever in this bizarre PC world in which we all live?

As for demonizing liberals, one must stop and ask what the heck Tom's, Burr's, and your own blogs do towards conservatives? Go back and look at the last half a dozen articles on any of those blogs and tell me if you really think that is not demonization of conservatives, sir.

"Dangerous idiots. ISIS is one of the consequences of their dangerous idiocy. And so is Trump. Thank you con-servatives. We owe you bigly." ~ Dubya

Perhaps curtailing our first amendment free speech rights with hate speech laws or even sending us to a "re-education camp" is in order, huh?

As for 9-11, I assume the Bush administration colluded with the 19 Islamofascist hijackers as cover for their bringing down of the world trade center, right? Please explain what possible motive the government could have for doing so? If they wanted to go to war in the Middle East they could have planned something else that would have been far less detrimental to our economy and all of their "evil rich" friends and donors that were affected by the World Trade Center collapse. Who is really on par with a "moonie cult" here, my friend?

And as for Trump's possible Russian collusion, if true he should be impeached and imprisoned. Frankly I still think Bill and Hillary were in greater collusion with the Ruskies than Trump ever was.

"American Progressivism is about willfully believing, with contrived or non-existent evidence, the worst lies about people they hate". - T. Paine

I look forward to your forthcoming article on how to think like a conservative. I am assuming, based on past evidence, that it will be presented as an unintended comedy.

Dave, I truly wish we could discuss things reasonably in debate. I guess that ship done sailed long ago though. Cheers to you regardless.

I suppose the militant left, as you portray it, is taking a page from the conservative playbook.

"No longer do we seek and work for justice. Now we work and 'resist' for retribution and revenge. Anyone that dares speak out of turn, let alone stray from far left ideology, shall feel that 'retribution' in all its wrath. Right?"

It would seem, Mr. Paine, that the days attempting to find common ground are long gone. The conservative movement made sure of this. Fighting fire with fire is now the appropriate modus operandi. It has come down to this, and it had to be this way. Conservatives don't play fair, never have, and now cry foul when they find resistant to their creeping fascism. Get used to it.

Don't forget it all started with the Republicans. In their quest to denounce and subvert the Obama presidency, the major players of the GOP met in a prominent Washington restaurant on the eve of his inauguration and colluded to thwart his presidency. It's payback time.

"I guess my quest to save common sense truly is at a desperate point in our nation right now."

I'd probably say so. It would have been more becoming a couple of decades ago, but not in these times. It's past the time of reconciliation.

"Roger Ailes is evil for providing a platform for ideas that are outside of progressive orthodoxy..."

You continue to use the word "ideas", but I continue to see the word as purposeful "lies". Others may view it as propaganda. Either way, Roger Ailes is demonized for being the perpetrator of untruths and innuendo upon the uneducated and uninitiated. To put it into parlance you may understand, he was the originator of "fake news".

TP,I appreciate your kind words and thoughtful response. I feel the same about you. It is your unreliable information, false accusations, and false beliefs that I challenge, not your motives.

I have to wonder what Is meant by “militant left”. Would they be the ones who train weapons on law enforcement officers and seize government buildings by arms like Bundy’s militia supporters? In that case there are very, very few of them. Far fewer that the militant Right.

Or maybe I’m way off. Greenhouse gas enhanced climate change is based on science and measurements. Is peer-reviewed science also part of the “militant left”? Seems so. Educators, journalists, scientists, liberals and union workers, are also all enemies of the people, I suppose?

This is an odd reaction to being called out for supporting a lie from your Trumpist friend. Facts would certainly help, but you offer none.

“an abject scorn for conservative view points”

I have no scorn for anyone wanting his Second Amendment rights. Nor do I scorn anyone who opposes abortion. I disagree with their denying a woman’s right to not bear the child of her rapist, though. I do scorn demonization, lies and false accusations.

“academia. Because little to no dissenting views are tolerated.”

This is patently false. You attach beliefs and actions of a few to the many. This is at the heart of conservatism’s demonization of liberals.

“I admittedly did not verify the veracity of it”

Thank you for admitting the truth. If I had a dollar for every time cons accept at face value so many falsehoods and slurs against liberals I’d be as rich as Soros.

“is it really a stretch to assume that neck ties would be considered a form of patriarchal superiority or oppression?”

Yes. It was satire. It’s not a stretch for those who want to believe the worst about liberals, as you have shown. I’ve heard men complain about their ties as metaphorical “silk collars and leashes” though. Maybe you like to wear ties. Many, if not most men, do not.

As for 9-11, I have offered no beliefs, no cult mantra, and not even any specific conspiracy theories. All I said was, “There are real reasons to think 9-11 wasn't investigated thoroughly and to question the government line.” Never did I suggest Bush colluded with terrorists.

“Please explain what possible motive the government could have for doing so? If they wanted to go to war in the Middle East”

What do you mean “if”? Bush, Cheney and their neo-con cronies wanted war. There is no doubt. They twisted intelligence and lied to get their war.

As you may know the Project for the New American Century openly called for, not just superiority, but for US military and economic dominance of the world. Of the twenty-five people who signed PNAC's founding statement of principles, ten went on to serve in the Bush Administration, including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz.

As the neocon think-tank so fatefully put it in "Rebuilding America's Defenses" a year before the 9/11 attacks: “Further, the process of transformation [of the military], even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor.”9-11 was their excuse to invade Iraq. And contrary to the lies, Saddam was an enemy, not an ally, of al-Qaeda. Liberals were accused of “siding with the terrorists” for questioning the war fever.

Bush and the neoons’ betrayal of our country, and the truth, brought about ISIS, and more dead Americans than 9-11.

Whether complicit or not, they got just what they needed for their agenda. These are facts, my friend.

What about that theory of “thousands of celebrating Muslims in New Jersey”? Does that 9-11 theory sound more grounded in reality?

“And as for Trump's possible Russian collusion”

At least you think it is possible. I respect that . There were contacts, and Russia aided in Hillary’s defeat. This is why we need investigation.

Start with, “Russia, if you’re listening...”. Next look at Flynn, and heed the words of ALL our intel agencies. Proceed to the Russians in the Oval Office being treated to codeword secret intelligence from Trump.

If you have anything more glaring than that about Bill and Hillary, you certainly have not shared it. The lie about uranium being a quid pro quo exchange for donations to the Clinton Foundation has been debunked.

Now, if you can, please share with us anything you deem unreasonable in what I’ve just said.

"An academic study from researchers at Brunel University London assessed 171 men, looking at their height, weight, overall physical strength and bicep circumference, along with their views on redistribution of wealth and income inequality. The study, published in the Evolution and Human Behavior journal, ​found that weaker men were more likely to favor socialist policies than stronger men."